Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

techemails.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 299 posts

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#181

Post by ValentineC »

whstl wrote: post #168
Twirrim wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was nothing surprising in that email chain at all, looking at it as someone with lots of experience in large companies. In a twisted kind of way, the replies were reasonable and logical. They're not dumb, they can see it was crap. No one org can actually own this fix, so in that kind of situation it realistically requires someone like Bill to choose someone to drive it, and demand updates to ensure that everyon…

Yeah. In context the answers make a lot of sense: it’s a dysfunctional company where ownership is non-existent and getting shit done is hard. This is how learned helplessness looks like when you’re a high level executive.

> This is how learned helplessness looks like when you’re a high level executive.

Must be nice being so useless, yet getting paid so much.

Though I guess these people must have been good at politicking to rise so high.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#182

Post by 12_throw_away »

noir_lord wrote: post #139
georgemcbay wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My favorite bit about this is how none of the execs want to take ownership of the change, but instead trying to put someone else in the hot seat and/or start a Committee. And with the exception of John Martin's reply (which recognizes that there are deeper problems they should think about, but seems resigned to the fact that that won't happen) the focus is pretty much entirely: "let's fix the exact issues Bill Gate…

> I haven't worked at any companies as large and siloed as Microsoft, but I'd assume this is pretty common for them. Doesn't need to be that large, I worked for a company that ~4500 employees with about 1000 at HQ, that entire email chain looks exactly like what would ensue every time someone at the C-level flagged an issue. I suspect the reason is much the same, no one wants to be in the hot seat to fix a problem th…

Also I suspect that there's no real teeth in that angry email.

If the big boss is frustrated by the UX, they might send an angry email or even yell at you in person. If your division doesn't meet its sales projection for the quarter, you might get fired.

If BillG had wanted a company that made good user experiences, he'd have hired (and fired) for that. Sending a pissy email is what you do when you're annoyed but don't actually care enough to do anything about it.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#183

Post by ValentineC »

vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #118
georgemcbay wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My favorite bit about this is how none of the execs want to take ownership of the change, but instead trying to put someone else in the hot seat and/or start a Committee. And with the exception of John Martin's reply (which recognizes that there are deeper problems they should think about, but seems resigned to the fact that that won't happen) the focus is pretty much entirely: "let's fix the exact issues Bill Gate…

It's very common. From a certain level up, execs rarely use the products they are responsible for. It's all about strategy, committees, meetings, plans and reports. For them the product is just an abstract thing. When I rented a Buick car, I thought to myself that there is no way any decision maker ever tried the car and thought that this is ok. I think one of the strengths of Apple during the Jobs days was that Jobs…

> When I look at the blatant bugs MacOS and iOS had in the last years, I also think that the current Apple big shots never use their stuff or they would have noticed.

The crazy thing is that it's more likely that most people in Apple are using their own products, versus any of the Android phone manufacturers or within Google, where it's likely a few of them would be using the Apple ecosystem instead.

Many of them are definitely dogfooding it, but it's possible that there are communication or empowerment issues.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#184

Post by pino83 »

baud147258 wrote: post #152
vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very common. From a certain level up, execs rarely use the products they are responsible for. It's all about strategy, committees, meetings, plans and reports. For them the product is just an abstract thing. When I rented a Buick car, I thought to myself that there is no way any decision maker ever tried the car and thought that this is ok. I think one of the strengths of Apple during the Jobs days was that Jobs…

> I also think that the current Apple big shots never use their stuff or they would have noticed. Or they do and they don't think it's worth their time and energy to get them fixed. I think they just don't care about their products, unlike Jobs.

If you'd take the Gates email and give them to my colleagues, saying "this was some random guy complaining about Windows", they'd all react along the lines of "Well, that's just an idiot who makes things up because he's bored and hates Windows. There are good reasons for everything he complained about. He just reports it in a quite dramatized way."

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#185

Post by ramesh31 »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #172
eddythompson80 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen that too many times too in big companies, but I wouldn't say that it results in nothinghappens.jpg It results in the equivalent of treating an infection with Tylenol rather than antibiotics. The exact symptom reported by a "Leader" will usually get fixed, but in a more of a "KPI hacking" rather than a fundamental fix to the problem. I have seen a "Leader" point to the staggering number of support tickets…

The more interesting question is why would so many thousands of people in a big firm seemingly be fine with frustrating customers and giving the appearance of a gaggle of clowns? Standard psychology says they should be highly sensitive to status loss, but it almost seems the opposite.

>"The more interesting question is why would so many thousands of people in a big firm seemingly be fine with frustrating customers and giving the appearance of a gaggle of clowns?"

Existing in a large org over the long term becomes a game of survival. It's very much similar to the "dark forest" or the Eye of Sauron. Your number one goal as an IC is to complete the tasks directly assigned to you by a supervisor and avoid at all costs any kind of "hey you" assignments that have zero upside and plenty of possibility for downside. It would be wonderful if we lived in a world where individual initiative mattered and was rewarded, but it doesn't. It becomes "why haven't you delivered XYZ", and the vague ephemeral reasoning of "well A, B and C for team D needed fixing" is not an excuse, and now you can't pay your mortgage anymore.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#188

Post by matja »

3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #26

My favorite bit about this is how none of the execs want to take ownership of the change, but instead trying to put someone else in the hot seat and/or start a Committee. This feels like an email that should have been blasted to the entire company. Top-down, empower employees to think of a more unified experience. Then again, all of the external jokes about Microsoft indicate that every department is fighting for the…

> every department is fighting for their lives against the others

https://bonkersworld.net/img/2011-06-27_organizational_chart...

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#190

Post by xtracto »

detourdog wrote: post #83
jameshart wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This email was literally BillG sending an email to the people he holds accountable for this, pointing out to them that he believes his experience resulted from a systematic lack of attention to end to end user experience. I’m not sure why you see this as evidence BillG didn’t understand that to be his job.

Becuase it was a typical MS user experience. MS was shipping their software on 25+ install floppies. Having an install fail on floppy 19 was a nightmare. Getting a fax modem that shipped with the PC to function could also be a problem MS would blame the vendor and the vendor blamed MS. It’s not like his moviemaker experience was a rare occurrence.

People forget the "if Microsoft invented the iPod" parody video."

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yvh5k1RWER4

It describes the culture of both companies at that time very clearly.

I think the difference between Apple and Microsoft is that Steve was a "product" CEO. He would bot only send that email, but in addition he would somehow oversee/sypervise those changes ALL the way until he was satisfied.

Post reply on HN